Can Democrats Turn Republican Led into Gold?

"I think that would cause more problems for Americans."
--Senator Hillary Clinton

"I'm not there yet."
--Senator Joe Biden (his time)

Why are Congressional Democrats balking at Representative John Murtha's call for withdrawal from Iraq (or, more accurately, redeployment to points not far distant from there)?

First, of course, like Republicans, they cater to the whims of their corporate donors. (Tell me again: They support this drain-on-the-economy-of-a-war why?) Also Democrats never pass up an opportunity to dispel the notion foisted on them by Republicans that they're soft on security.

In fact, the Democrats' situation is ideal because they can have it both ways. They avoid blame for the war because the Republicans started it, but they can look like they're standing fast. As for standing up (to the administration), that's another matter.

Should US forces remain en masse in Iraq by the next presidential election and a Democrat wins, he or she will likely not only consent to more bloodshed, but rub our faces in it. "How's that for wimpiness? You want your ruling party to be a warrior clan, you've got it."

However, before too long, the new president must withdraw our forces (at least to surrounding states). Otherwise, instead of looking like they're cleaning up the Republicans' mess, the Democrats will become infected from handling it, perhaps fatally.

In plain speaking. . . . During the prelude to the war, the Democrats were like dogs chasing a fox. They barked and bayed, while, in the saddle, the Republicans pulled the trigger. Meanwhile whatever viability the war ever had has long since died. The Democrats, however, continue to wallow in it like dogs rolling around in the stinking remains of a dead animal.